JC Penny

Honestly, all of the it/its are wrong in these answer. Another singular noun, policy, was introduced and you should use a more descriptive phrase.

Jim@StratusPrep wrote:Honestly, all of the it/its are wrong in these answer. Another singular noun, policy, was introduced and you should use a more descriptive phrase.

I had once doubted Kaplan Q but i later found that it was correct for some very good reasons.

We are describing how the JC Penney chain broke with its previous policy; since we are modifying a verb, we need an adverbial phrase to do so. "in deciding" or "by deciding" fit this criteria, which allows us to eliminate A, B, and C.

A--"broke with its policy...for deciding"
B--"broke with its policy for the decision"
C--"broke with its policy...for its decision"

D works well: "broke with its policy in deciding...to sell"

E runs into a problem at the end: "broke with its policy by deciding...on the selling of"

Bill@VeritasPrep wrote:We are describing how the JC Penney chain broke with its previous policy; since we are modifying a verb, we need an adverbial phrase to do so. "in deciding" or "by deciding" fit this criteria, which allows us to eliminate A, B, and C.

A--"broke with its policy...for deciding"
B--"broke with its policy for the decision"
C--"broke with its policy...for its decision"

"for deciding" is also adverbial prep. phrase.
what is the criteria for selection?

You could eliminate A for placing the prepositional phrase too far away from what it's supposed to be modifying. As written, A has:

"its 1958 reorganization for deciding to sell..."

which could be interpreted to mean that the reorganization was simply dedicated to this decision.

Bill@VeritasPrep wrote:You could eliminate A for placing the prepositional phrase too far away from what it's supposed to be modifying. As written, A has:

"its 1958 reorganization for deciding to sell..."

which could be interpreted to mean that the reorganization was simply dedicated to this decision.

For a prepositional phrases at the end of a sentence no comma is required to indicate whether it is Adverbial or Adjectival in nature. This two-way interpretation, however, complicates the associated meaning of whole sentence.

Any thought on how to identify these adverbial and adjectival prepositional phrases ?

imskpwr wrote:The J.C. Penney chain of retail stores broke with its conservative cash-and-carry policy during its 1958 reorganization for deciding to sell on credit.

during its 1958 reorganization for deciding to sell

for the decision at its 1958 reorganization to sell

when it was reorganized in 1958 for its decision to sell

in deciding during its reorganization in 1958 to sell

by deciding at its reorganization in 1958 on the selling of

Totally confused in this one.

FOR + VERBing and FOR + NOUN typically serve to tell us WHY.
The governor has been criticized FOR RAISING TAXES.
The judge has been praised FOR HIS DECISION.
In the first sentence, raising taxes is WHY the governor has been criticized.
In the second sentence, the judge's decision is WHY the judge has been praised.

But in A and B, deciding to sell on credit and the decision to sell on credit were not WHY the chain of retail stores broke with its conservative cash-and-carry policy.
Rather, deciding to sell on credit was the WAY in which the chain broke with its previous policy.

In C, the decision to sell on credit was not WHY the chain was reorganized.

Thus, the idioms in A, B and C -- FOR deciding, FOR the decision and FOR its decision -- do not convey the intended meaning.
Eliminate A, B and C.

In E, by deciding...on the selling is unidiomatic. Eliminate E.

The correct answer is D.

IN + VERBing typically serves to express IN WHAT WAY something happened.
In D, IN deciding correctly implies that deciding to sell on credit was the WAY in which the chain of stores broke with its previous policy.